[siouxforeverbaby]

Goon, on Aug 26 2007, 06:53 PM, said:

Chewey, on Aug 26 2007, 04:36 PM, said:

Agree. Expose the NC00 for what it really is. I think if the matter goes to trial, I'd subpoena several of the UND professors and ask about them having scummed UND during the last several years and what role they played in getting the NC00 to not follow its "policy" with respect to UND.

Then have them fired. When I read that these bozos did that I wanted to ask them why even work here if UND is such a horrible place. Seems its good enohgh for them come pay day. Some of these people need to go out and do some real work at a real job...

stupid part is they are probably tenure and can't be fired. They can quit but they can't be fired. Which then why don't they? cause they would not be able to fufill their duty in telling the poor uninformed students their wise wisdom.

[ScottM]

Quote

Nevertheless, an allegation repeated often enough and persistently enough eventually takes on a certain degree of believability among those who want to believe it.

So, Lloyd, that would still leave "those" as the whining, simpering minority. Good to see you lost your cajones when you entered academia. Or politics.

[Shawn-O]

Quote

Then there’s the outrageous cost of the lawsuit. Those funding the litigation have a right to spend their money as they choose, but the billing must have escalated beyond their expectations. By the time the suit is over, logo supporters will be spending at least $1 million.

Compared to sandblasting REA, this sounds cheap at twice the price.

[SoCalSiouxFan]

Shawn-O, on Aug 27 2007, 02:16 PM, said:

Quote

Then there’s the outrageous cost of the lawsuit. Those funding the litigation have a right to spend their money as they choose, but the billing must have escalated beyond their expectations. By the time the suit is over, logo supporters will be spending at least $1 million.

Compared to sandblasting REA, this sounds cheap at twice the price.

Isn't the NCAA funding the litigation? Doesn't the loser pay the legal costs? Far as I see the NCAA can't win on this one so my guess is that they pay.

Litigation could turn out to be a sound financial investment, especially if the lawsuit is successful and damages, interest, and court costs are awarded to North Dakota. It will be interesting to see what the settlement outcome will be.

[Goon]

ScottM, on Aug 26 2007, 09:11 PM, said:

Quote

Nevertheless, an allegation repeated often enough and persistently enough eventually takes on a certain degree of believability among those who want to believe it.

So, Lloyd, that would still leave "those" as the whining, simpering minority. Good to see you lost your cajones when you entered academia. Or politics.

Don't blame me I didn't vote for him nor would I...

[Chewey]

Shawn-O, on Aug 27 2007, 04:16 PM, said:

Quote

Then there’s the outrageous cost of the lawsuit. Those funding the litigation have a right to spend their money as they choose, but the billing must have escalated beyond their expectations. By the time the suit is over, logo supporters will be spending at least $1 million.

Compared to sandblasting REA, this sounds cheap at twice the price.

Isn't it funny how they always forget that? I guess those costs don't count since "it shouldn't have been built in the fist place" or since "it's so offensive."

[Goon]

Chewey, on Aug 27 2007, 06:29 PM, said:

Shawn-O, on Aug 27 2007, 04:16 PM, said:

Quote

Then there’s the outrageous cost of the lawsuit. Those funding the litigation have a right to spend their money as they choose, but the billing must have escalated beyond their expectations. By the time the suit is over, logo supporters will be spending at least $1 million.

Compared to sandblasting REA, this sounds cheap at twice the price.

Isn't it funny how they always forget that? I guess those costs don't count since "it shouldn't have been built in the fist place" or since "it's so offensive."

I am still convinced if these people want it changed so bad let them pick up the tabs to have it removed.
If you did that you wouldn't hear them complaining much longer.

[siouxfan123]

SoCalSiouxFan, on Aug 27 2007, 04:54 PM, said:

Shawn-O, on Aug 27 2007, 02:16 PM, said:

Quote

Then there’s the outrageous cost of the lawsuit. Those funding the litigation have a right to spend their money as they choose, but the billing must have escalated beyond their expectations. By the time the suit is over, logo supporters will be spending at least $1 million.

Compared to sandblasting REA, this sounds cheap at twice the price.

Isn't the NCAA funding the litigation? Doesn't the loser pay the legal costs? Far as I see the NCAA can't win on this one so my guess is that they pay.

Litigation could turn out to be a sound financial investment, especially if the lawsuit is successful and damages, interest, and court costs are awarded to North Dakota. It will be interesting to see what the settlement outcome will be.

Generally no, the loser does not pay the legal cots (lawyers), the court can order them to pay for court costs though.

[TRex]

The loser usually only pays court costs in frivolous lawsuits, but not in this case, since it has merit. So, you can forget the idea of NCAA picking up the tab after Janke rules in favor of UND, and UND won't get stuck with the bill after the Honorable Judge is overturned on appeal.

As per the cost of removing said offensive logos, Ralph was warned many times the logo would someday have to go and he chose to ignore it. I'd say either UND or REA, Inc will have to eat the cost. No way this issue will disappear until we get a neutral logo. Sorry, but I'm a UND grad too.

[PCM]

TRex, on Aug 27 2007, 10:20 PM, said:

As per the cost of removing said offensive logos, Ralph was warned many times the logo would someday have to go and he chose to ignore it.

Warned by whom? The PC police?

[Diggler]

PCM, on Aug 27 2007, 10:23 PM, said:

TRex, on Aug 27 2007, 10:20 PM, said:

As per the cost of removing said offensive logos, Ralph was warned many times the logo would someday have to go and he chose to ignore it.

Warned by whom? The PC police?

Joey Jo Jo... Junior... Shabadoo

[Sioux-cia]

Diggler, on Aug 27 2007, 09:26 PM, said:

PCM, on Aug 27 2007, 10:23 PM, said:

Warned by whom? The PC police?

Joey Jo Jo... Junior... Shabadoo

La La-land Morning Glory

[PCM]

Sioux-cia, on Aug 27 2007, 10:44 PM, said:

La La-land Morning Glory

In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida

[dakotadan]

TRex, on Aug 27 2007, 10:20 PM, said:

Ralph was warned many times the logo would someday have to go and he chose to ignore it.

That's news. Do the Herald or Forum know about this? I am sure they would love to run a story on it.

[Chewey]

TRex, on Aug 27 2007, 10:20 PM, said:

The loser usually only pays court costs in frivolous lawsuits, but not in this case, since it has merit. So, you can forget the idea of NCAA picking up the tab after Janke rules in favor of UND, and UND won't get stuck with the bill after the Honorable Judge is overturned on appeal.

As per the cost of removing said offensive logos, Ralph was warned many times the logo would someday have to go and he chose to ignore it. I'd say either UND or REA, Inc will have to eat the cost. No way this issue will disappear until we get a neutral logo. Sorry, but I'm a UND grad too.

If UND were to win and if the matter were taken to a higher court, the reviewing court would have to consider the factual findings of a jury and not Judge Jahnke. Any factual findings would be entitled to great weight and would not be disturbed unless there was clear error. Somehow, I don't think that a jury's finding that the NC00 failed to follow its own clearly dictated policies and procedures could be construed as clearly erroneous. You seem to think that the issue will "disappear" when and if a "neutral logo" is adopted. Presumably, this is when the whining of the PC crowd would cease. Somehow, you think that those in favor of the logo/name would simply forget about it. Did you not read the several articles about Dartmouth? ? ? ? ? The Dartmouth experience would pale in comparison to UND.

[GeauxSioux]

Standing Rock veterans board backs UND Fighting Sioux nickname

Quote

The governing board of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation's Veterans Group voted unanimously Monday to throw its support behind UND's Fighting Sioux nickname.

That vote came during a meeting with Ralph Engelstad Arena envoy Sam Dupris, an enrolled member of the Cheyenne River Sioux tribe and a decorated Korean War veteran.

Dupris has been visiting Sioux officials on the arena's behalf since early this summer, part of an arena attempt to improve its relations with Sioux tribes, which are strained over UND's continued use of the Sioux nickname.

Quote

Black Cloud said he believes most veterans on the reservation support the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo, though not all.

“I don't see any reason to object to it,” Black Cloud said of the logo. “There's nothing actually derogatory about the emblem itself. It's an Indian with feathers, and that's what the warriors of our tribe wore.”

[ScottM]

GeauxSioux, on Aug 28 2007, 06:51 AM, said:

Standing Rock veterans board backs UND Fighting Sioux nickname

Quote

The governing board of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation's Veterans Group voted unanimously Monday to throw its support behind UND's Fighting Sioux nickname.

That vote came during a meeting with Ralph Engelstad Arena envoy Sam Dupris, an enrolled member of the Cheyenne River Sioux tribe and a decorated Korean War veteran.

Dupris has been visiting Sioux officials on the arena's behalf since early this summer, part of an arena attempt to improve its relations with Sioux tribes, which are strained over UND's continued use of the Sioux nickname.

Quote

Black Cloud said he believes most veterans on the reservation support the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo, though not all.

“I don't see any reason to object to it,” Black Cloud said of the logo. “There's nothing actually derogatory about the emblem itself. It's an Indian with feathers, and that's what the warriors of our tribe wore.”

I believe these "Hang around the Fort" Indians need to be educated in the errors of their ways by some white UND faculty and staff.

[sioux7>5]

GeauxSioux, on Aug 28 2007, 06:51 AM, said:

Standing Rock veterans board backs UND Fighting Sioux nickname

Quote

The governing board of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation's Veterans Group voted unanimously Monday to throw its support behind UND's Fighting Sioux nickname.

That vote came during a meeting with Ralph Engelstad Arena envoy Sam Dupris, an enrolled member of the Cheyenne River Sioux tribe and a decorated Korean War veteran.

Dupris has been visiting Sioux officials on the arena's behalf since early this summer, part of an arena attempt to improve its relations with Sioux tribes, which are strained over UND's continued use of the Sioux nickname.

Quote

Black Cloud said he believes most veterans on the reservation support the Fighting Sioux nickname and logo, though not all.

“I don't see any reason to object to it,” Black Cloud said of the logo. “There's nothing actually derogatory about the emblem itself. It's an Indian with feathers, and that's what the warriors of our tribe wore.”

I think that the NCAA needs to start listening to the Sioux people and not the Sioux politicians. I think this above article just proves that point. The people support the name and logo.

[Chief Illiniwek Supporter]

GeauxSioux, on Aug 28 2007, 06:51 AM, said:

Standing Rock veterans board backs UND Fighting Sioux nickname

Quote

The governing board of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation's Veterans Group voted unanimously Monday to throw its support behind UND's Fighting Sioux nickname...

...

1) Does anyone know what % of the tribe population this Veterans Group represents?

2) One of your local tribes apparently no longer uses the term "Sioux" to represent themselves. Was this the Standing Rock group? (edit: ignore this question-apparently its the Spirit Lake group that no longer uses that moniker.)(edited at 1:00 pm Central time.)

[Chewey]

Chief Illiniwek Supporter, on Aug 28 2007, 10:15 AM, said:

GeauxSioux, on Aug 28 2007, 06:51 AM, said:

Standing Rock veterans board backs UND Fighting Sioux nickname

Quote

The governing board of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation's Veterans Group voted unanimously Monday to throw its support behind UND's Fighting Sioux nickname...

...

1) Does anyone know what % of the tribe population this Veterans Group represents?

2) One of your local tribes apparently no longer uses the term "Sioux" to represent themselves. Was this the Standing Rock group? (edit: ignore this question-apparently its the Spirit Lake group that no longer uses that moniker.)(edited at 1:00 pm Central time.)

I would venture to say that it is representative of the vast majority opinion on the reservation. I'm not sure how many veterans it speaks for though.